Critical Discourse Analysis of a Native and Non-Native Translator of Tirukural
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
David 1 Navajyoti, International Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Research Volume 5, Issue 2, February 2021 CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF A NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE TRANSLATOR OF TIRUKURAL Chris Tina David, M.A English with Cultural Studies Christ University, Bengaluru. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract: Various articles and papers that were found on the translation studies are mostly on the translated text rather on the translator. Therefore, the area in which this paper is attempting to pave the way to give equal importance to the translator as well as the product. The translated text this paper focuses on is a classical Tamil literary text which is originally called ‘Muppaal’, famously pointed out as ‘Kural’. Kural has been considered as the most widely translated non- religious text. It is said that the text has been translated into eighty-two languages. This paper has chosen to compare and contrast based on critical discourse analysis are George Uglow Pope and Sri Varahaneri Venkatesa Subramnaiam Aiyar. The motive to relay on the above-given translators is only because these translators are the ones who first translated the whole text on the category of native and non-native translators. Keywords: Translation studies, Kural ______________________________________________________________________________ Introduction The rapidly growing multidisciplinary identity of translation studies has extended its range not only at the linguistic level but took the discipline to the practical experience of the translator to know the product given by the translator. Placing the translated text in front and ignoring the translator is prejudicial work. The connection between any text and the translator is equally David 2 important as the connection between the text and the author. Various articles and papers that were found on the translation studies are mostly on the translated text rather on the translator. Therefore, the area in which this paper is attempting to pave the way to give equal importance to the translator as well as the product. The translated text this paper focuses on is a classical Tamil literary text which is originally called ‘Muppaal’, famously pointed out as ‘Kural’. This text was believed to be written by Thiruvalluvar. His name and the history of both the text and the author is still debatable, but the fact that it is written in old Tamil proves that this belongs around 31st BC. The specialty of the text lies, on the condition that the author refrains from dealing with any ideas related to caste, religion, or language. Because the paper deals with the text and the context, it is important to look at the period in which the text has been written. The texts written in the period comes under the ‘sangam literature’. Since the text ‘kural’ has no prejudice made this text spread across overseas. Kural has been considered as the most widely translated non- religious text. It is said that the text has been translated into eighty-two languages. As a writer, who is bilingual in Tamil and English, it is just fine to focus on the translations in English. The English language solely has fifty-seven versions accessible in hand. In this paper, one is likely to stick to one translator who is alien to Tamil and made an attempt to translate kural to English and on the other hand, who is a native speaker of Tamil and made an attempt to translate into English. Further narrowing it down to the translators the author has chosen to compare and contrast based on critical discourse analysis are George Uglow Pope and Sri Varahaneri Venkatesa Subramnaiam Aiyar. The motive to relay on the above-given translators is only because these translators are the ones who first translated the whole text on the category of native and non-native translators. G U Pope was a missionary from Canada, who spent around forty years in Tamil Nadu. Along with the translation of Kural, he also translated many texts including a famous text from the Sangam literature which is ‘Thiruvasagam’. Later, he became a scholar in Tamil, Sanskrit, and Telugu. On the other hand, V S S Aiyar was a freedom fighter from Tamil Nadu who fought against the British Colonization. He also contributed to the Tamil literature; in addition to that, he was called the father of Tamil modern short story. He translated the Thirukural under the title ‘The Kural or the Maxims of Thiruvalluvar’ in 1916. G U Pope, on the other hand, translated the Kural under the title ‘The sacred Kurral of Thiruvalluvar Nayanar’ in 1958. It was the period when the British colonized India. To contextualize the period with the translation made by both the translators is important because it is inevitable to look into the David 3 context and the text from two different angles. Therefore, this paper will reveal the process and politics of the translations undergone by both the translators through critical discourse analysis with a major part given to the author and the reason for the terms used by them in the translation. The methodology used here to analyze the above mentioned translated texts is critical discourse analysis which is used when language is used as a tool to communicate the essence to explain the content. In the meantime, we would come across politics and the context of the texts. Critical discourse analysis, therefore, studies the structure, meaning, shape, from the tone to the reception of the text by outspread spectators. The application of each term, content, essence falls under the discourse is also the fragment of the assessment. The methodology enables analysis of more than one simple question by inculcating what discourse is being asked to do in the process of encoding (translating), decoding, and utilization by the reader. Literature review As ‘Kural’ is considered a widely known text, there are many scholars who explored various aspects through it. While encountering some articles and research papers, one can find few gaps waiting for them to be explored. There are a few articles mentioned here to give the overall view of the area and how much it has been explored. Also, this paper has hired a few ideas from books and articles to justify the argument made by the writer. ‘Active vs Reactive Texts in the translations of Thirukkural’ by S P Visalakshi. This article talks about the translation of G U Pope by using step by step systematic analysis. This article weakens when the text concludes by stating that this translation does not contain the essence of the original. This void can be filled during the process. ‘French Translations of Thirukural – A Comparative Study’ by Dr. Uma Allaghery, in her articles compare two versions of translations of Thirukural. The writer wrapped by the article by comparing the two selected couplets form the selected versions and stated these two translators gave their best in translations according to their socio-cultural and sociolinguistic perspectives. This article contains the idea in which each translator will be inclined to their respective cultural and linguistic background with or without their conscious mind. The idea will be borrowed and utilized in this paper. David 4 “Tirukkural Translations of G U Pope and Rajaji – A Comparative Study” written by J Jaya Parveen and V Rajesh. Here the writers compare these two translations based on the linguistic level. They further deal with lexical choice, punctuation, and collocation, and so on. Moving on with the same idea, they had chosen a few Kural from both the translations and tried comparing with the other. In the concluding statement, the writers have made a statement that G U Pope had translated ‘word to word’ kind whereas, while Rajaji translated ‘sense to sense’ kind of translation. As a writer of this paper, one can find this article hold gaps which can be filled in this paper by starting with G U Pope’s translation cannot be comprised in a term like ‘word to word’ translation. The idea of Critical discourse analysis was borrowed from the book ‘Research Methodologies in Translations Studies- Routledge’ by Gabriela Saldanha and Sharon O’Brien. This book comprises many methodologies that can be used under translation studies. Giuseppe Palumbo’s work ‘Key Terms in Translation Studies-Continuum’ enlightened this paper in the usage of a few technical terms in the area of translation studies. This book can be a guide for scholars pursuing this area. Also, this book comprises major thinkers in translation studies that aid the writers in many ways. Furthermore, the book also directs the scholars to many more readings to gain deeper knowledge in this particular area. Critical Discourse Analysis After encountering with the preface to, The Sacred Kurral given by Dr. G U Pope, one could understand the purpose of his translation. ‘I tried to help forward the study of this admirable language among both Europeans and the Natives’ (pope, 1886). As a writer of this paper and as a reader of this translation, one will find out whether Dr. Pope has attained his purpose during the process of his translation. ‘I have in transliteration used rr for ‘ra (letter in Tamil-an extra stress in R)’ and have, therefore, written Kurral. In this, I follow the example of Beschi’ (Pope, 1886). Constantine Joseph Beschi, also known as Veeramamunivar, who composed the first Tamil lexicon – a Tamil Latin dictionary on which Pope looked up for his references. Other than this reference, there is in nowhere it is mentioned about the source of his learning. As one could agree on, every